56 replies to this topic

[Diablobo]

Hammer, you think you are some great debater, but all you are is an [redacted]. You have not rebutted the original point one bit, and you even supported my point. Trial mechs lose versus custom mechs most of the time. Elo doesn't matter when you stick a great pilot in a crappy mech. That being true, given players with equal skill levels, it doesn't make a fair fight to stick the good player grinding out his four ballistic Cicada against the weaker player who has a tricked out Highlander.

Edited by Dakkath, 18 June 2013 - 06:06 AM.
CoC Violation

[cyberFluke]

Roughneck45, on 18 June 2013 - 04:44 AM, said:

That being said, Mechwarrior is a niche game, always has been always will be. There is enough of a dedicated fan base to keep this game alive regardless of how many new players leave IMO. It seems that people either love it or hate it.

Unfortunately, they've alienated most of those hardcore BT/MW fans with the constant watering down of the mechanics and game chasing a "wider market audience". They've pushed away the dedicated fans yet failed to impress the mainstream. I won't hesitate to point out yet another example of corporate beancounters ruining a great game idea through boneheaded ignorance and pure, unadulterated greed.

I'll also be quick to point out that the other three people out of my group of four who bought founders got a refund. I opted not to, as I was a damn fool.

[5th Fedcom Rat]

I just lost something like 10 matches in a row this morning while dropping solo. And before anyone says it was a premade team bump being brought back down to average, I usually drop solo.

Horrible team mates on my side that can't seem to kill anything let alone do over 100 damage + decent to excellent premades on the other side + high alpha builds = fecal matter matches.

Will be taking a break from the game for a little while again.

.

Edited by 5th Fedcom Rat, 18 June 2013 - 05:46 AM.

[Diablobo]

I know exactly how you feel Rat....I cannot stomach dropping with noobs anymore, and unless the new patch is some great miracle, I am going to be playing this game less and less until they figure out some way to deal with the idiots.

[cyberFluke]

Did EVE Online become the money making, player pleasing game it is today through making the game simpler or dumbing it down? I've tried it, played it for 18 months, even though I don't like it because it was difficult and a challenge. I had to learn and adapt, there were struggles and losses. More importantly, I had a sense of achievement when I succeeded, I felt good about myself when I learned to do things I previously couldn't.

I left EVE because I wanted a space game, but I got an economic sim. At this rate, I'll be leaving MWO because I got an even more watered down version of MechWarrior then M$ turned out with MW4, which is where I stopped playing the series. I'll have a very bitter aftertaste from MWO because I was duped into paying $120 for a product whose design direction was heavily modified from the sales pitch after the suits in charge saw how much money the founders initiative made and took a much more "active" role in project management.

[The Basilisk]

As far as I understand the current ELO system, it doesn't match players, but tries to create Teams, first by ELO and second by tonnage.

So If its realy the case this posts opener is a seasoned pilot, his high ELO will lead the system to pair him with lower ranking warriors to compensate for his higher ranking.
On the other team accordingly.
So a team of all out mediocre but teaming players will be allways the winner over teams with 2 or three high ELO lone Wolves and a bunch of noobs.
Think about it. This would explain next to all lamentation threads about single "I'm such a great pilot and they are all so weak" threads around the forum.

[DaZur]

cyberFluke, on 18 June 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Unfortunately, they've alienated most of those hardcore BT/MW fans with the constant watering down of the mechanics and game chasing a "wider market audience". They've pushed away the dedicated fans yet failed to impress the mainstream. I won't hesitate to point out yet another example of corporate beancounters ruining a great game idea through boneheaded ignorance and pure, unadulterated greed.

I'll also be quick to point out that the other three people out of my group of four who bought founders got a refund. I opted not to, as I was a damn fool.

No offense but this presumes this vaunted "hardcore BT/MW fan" was enough to support this game.

Truth is, we lost a large contingency of the "TT grognards" when they realised this was not / could not be a direct translation of their pen/paper game and we lost more of these "hardcore BT/MW fans" when it became a foregone conclusion that the game needed to be generalize to make it appeal to a wider audience.

IMHO it's disingenuous to complain about diminishing player numbers on one hand and then complain about "noobs" and the proverbial "watering down" of MW:O to make it appeal to a "wider market audience" on the other...

Edited by DaZur, 18 June 2013 - 06:42 AM.

[Dakkath]

I've cleaned up this thread a bit, please stay on topic and refrain from attacking each other.

Thanks,
Dak

[jakucha]

tenderloving, on 18 June 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

There aren't enough players in the system for ELO to work properly.

Except you can't prove that there are enough players or aren't enough, so stop making a claim like it's a fact. I'm betting most of it comes down to the fact that assaults are overused and leads to unbalanced teams.

Edited by jakucha, 18 June 2013 - 06:10 AM.

[cyberFluke]

DaZur, on 18 June 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

No offense but this presumes this vaunted "hardcore BT/MW fan" was enough to support this game.

Truth is, we lost a large contingency of the "TT gronards" when they realised this was not / could not be a direct translation of their pen/paper game and we lost more of these "hardcore BT/MW fans" when it became a foregone conclusion that the game needed to be generalize to make it appeal to a wider audience.

IMHO it's disingenuous to complain about diminishing player numbers on one hand and then complain about "noobs" and the proverbial "watering down" of MW:O to make it appeal to a "wider market audience" on the other...

It was enough to make millions and get the suits to pay attention in the first place, I'd say it was enough to make a start and grow from there, like other successful games. Unfortunately, the suits-in-charge would rather go for the quick return on investment and burn it out in six months.

Edited by cyberFluke, 18 June 2013 - 06:26 AM.

[DaZur]

jakucha, on 18 June 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

Except you can't prove that there are enough players or aren't enough, so stop making a claim like it's a fact.

True.

Elo is at its core an averages driven matchmaker and as such regardless of the sampling pool the end result essentially is the same. Only difference being the total number of matches necessary to establish the individual players mean average...

So th that end, Elo does not specifically benefit nor does it in any way expose the player-base sample pool...

Edited by DaZur, 18 June 2013 - 06:35 AM.

[Bilbo]

tenderloving, on 18 June 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

There aren't enough players in the system for ELO to work properly.

Just out of curiosity, how many players is enough to make an ELO system work properly and how far away are we from that number?

[DaZur]

cyberFluke, on 18 June 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

It was enough to make millions and get the suits to pay attention in the first place, I'd say it was enough to make a start and grow from there, like other successful games.

WIthout a doubt...

That said, if PGI elected to stay the course in catering exclusively to that "hardcore BT/MW fan"... They would ultimately be left with a relatively small, albeit highly dedicated / rabid player-base that would effectively be it's own worst enemy as it would be a tough club to crack and would be even less approachable to new players than what we presently have...

Whether we like to admit to it or not... the BT universe and Mechwarrior stuff is a niche genre and suffers somewhat from the neck-beard grognard stigma associated with it...

[General Taskeen]

I feel that ELO is better for MOBA games, not FPS games.

[cyberFluke]

DaZur, on 18 June 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

WIthout a doubt...

That said, if PGI elected to stay the course in catering exclusively to that "hardcore BT/MW fan"... They would ultimately be left with a relatively small, albeit highly dedicated / rabid player-base that would effectively be it's own worst enemy as it would be a tough club to crack and would be even less approachable to new players than what we presently have...

Whether we like to admit to it or not... the BT universe and Mechwarrior stuff is a niche genre and suffers somewhat from the neck-beard grognard stigma associated with it...

If the game had stayed more sim based, with just piloting the mech being a challenge, let alone shooting something, that gives a good, rewarding game. All you need to expand the playerbase is spend time making sure the new player experience is well developed with well built tutorials, perhaps as a short co-operative/single player five or six mission set. Well organised tournaments and well placed advertising would do the rest.

The problem is, it requires the *ahem* "person" holding the purse strings to not be completely ignorant of how this industry actually works. I mean sure, you've made a pile of money, but it's a smaller pile than it would have been, and you've made a *very* bad name for yourself. No potential customer will trust you again. Hope you're happy with the little pile of money you get, I hope it was effing worth it.

Edited by cyberFluke, 18 June 2013 - 06:54 AM.

[hammerreborn]

General Taskeen, on 18 June 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

I feel that ELO is better for MOBA games, not FPS games.

Elo is fine. There are only 4 possible issues that may or may not exist:

i) low population - can't make good matches because there are no nearby Elo players. Off-peak players suffer from this the most. This is probably unlikely in peak hours, likely in off.

ii) class based Elo - can have drastically different games based on which mech you are playing (until you've reached a threshold of games where it evens out). See also iii). This is probably a very likely issue especially with new players or someone that has just switched their class for the first time, but inevitably works itself out.

iii) premades - group Elo can drastically change based on group/class composition. For instance, I can pretty much artificially tank my good teams Elo rating by driving in an Atlas (or any assault), something I have only done 8 times since new stats have been tracked (likewise, them in lights). This would put us in an artificially low Elo bracket where it would be easier to win. We could possibly be paired up with new players if two played lights, I played an assault, and the last a medium. Then there's just teaming up with bad players. I know I'm pretty much going to be in faceroll territory if I group with some specific people. Furthermore, Elo can't account for all the benefits TS gives. This is a huge issue.

and

iv) queue times - other than for 8 mans, these are fast. Perhaps too fast. I think it waits about a minute before deciding to say f-it and match you in a very broad fashion. While this is good because who wants to wait 5 minutes for a match that might not even last that long, it's hard for a matchmaker to compensate. An increased acceptable wait time would probably lead to better matches, but general annoyance at the delay.

In order of severity, I'd argue iii, iv, i, ii as issues the matchmakers face.

Edited by hammerreborn, 18 June 2013 - 06:57 AM.

[SpiralRazor]

Amen brother.....I CANNOT be expected to carry an entire team of trials. Also, there is NO way...NO WAY I should be matched with players just starting out.

Its not fair to them and its not fair to me. I would wait twice as long for better matching. In NWO, I wait 30 mins for a good group.

Edited by SpiralRazor, 18 June 2013 - 06:59 AM.

[JokerVictor]

Bilbo, on 18 June 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

Just out of curiosity, how many players is enough to make an ELO system work properly and how far away are we from that number?

I can only ballpark this, so don't take this incredibly seriously.

In my best guess, I'd say you need several hundred active players (actively in matches or queues) in each 100-200 point Elo bracket to keep the wild mismatches in skill from popping up too often, and keep the wait times to a minimum. Wikipedia shows the chess bracket breakdown from 100 to 2400 rating to have 14 buckets. Since I don't feel like doing calculus I'll just estimate 200-300 players per bucket (yes I know this is wrong, the middle ratings are much higher weighted, but the average should still be roughly the same.)

So, that's ideally between 2800-4200 players actively in games or searching for games, just in the pug queue. I highly doubt MWO has over 2000 online players even in primetime, let alone active players. So, sh*t teams abound.

[Tarrasque]

Man, rough crowd.


I'm definitely on the higher end of Elo and whatnot, and I can say that I've never really had a problem with 'noobs' (god, I hate that word) in my games - that's not to say they're not there, I'm saying that:

a) There are rarely such a proliferation of new players in my drop team that it really effects the outcome

2) I'm glad I get the chance to play with any and all players of this game, and take it upon myself to correct obviously wrong actions taken by the new guys.

Are the new players just supposed to grope around in the dark until they're at the 'uber leet' level you all expect them to be? Maybe it's because I'm in school for education, but the idea that the unwashed masses need to be separated from my unholy skills of wrath is asinine.

Get off the high horse, teach a player or two something that will benefit both of you. Or don't, and play better to compensate for them.

Either way, writing a post calling for the abolition of a mechanic somewhat recently implemented is pretty counterproductive, and sounds a lot like tears to me.


Do yourself a favor, and watch this:

http://www.youtube.c...d&v=cOIZXxB1nlI

Edited by Tarrasque, 18 June 2013 - 07:07 AM.

[Purlana]

Doesn't the other team have a similar change of getting "Noobs"?

My theory is that most players are average, and it's really the 1-2 exceptional players that tip the scales.

Edited by Purlana, 18 June 2013 - 08:15 AM.